http://www.guysoflidar.com/
Printable View
Yay for the Guys Of Lidar sections!
X2!! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by crazyVOLVOrob
Awsome, thanks alot guys.
Those Cobras sure aint looking good in those tests
Was there any difference in the Bel STi units? Firmware? 33.8 fix?
Hmmm...the V940 didn't do bad at all :shock:
Would this replace the V955 as the new "best budget" detector?
I cannot tell you enough how happy I am to see more of the popular RD's tested and not just the favored few. Thank you for the hard work!
The 940 did a stellar job and it looks like to me it's going to boil down to manufacturer difference between the 940 all the way up to the RX-65.
Much to my surprise the 9500i did spectacular, it did so good that I considered it a fluke and went to Best-Buy the following day to buy another one to see what was up. Sure enough the 2nd one did just as good. So props to Escort for bringing it up to par. Props to Beltronics for fixing the 33.8 issue and making the STi a better detector.
As the results will show my Valentine 1 3.813 was a beast. The legend lives on :)
I think you can see the norm now with the Guys of Lidar. No longer are we going to announce events, but yet every now and then you might get a surprise in this section. If by any chance the manufactures care about the GoL this might keep um on their toes.
Special thanks to Jerry540i for driving all the way from Toronto to Cincinnati, back to the Cleveland area to make sure we had a STi with the 33.8 fix to test. He also graciously allowed us to use his Lexus which makes for some very comfortable testing.
Enjoy the results, we have some videos that will be coming out today as well where we put the 9500i true lock feature through the ringer.
Looks like the M4 horn in the new V995 is lousy
What the heck did Escort do to the 9500i? It put up some impressive performance numbers! The STi looks good too, but was sort of surprised it didn't do better on 35.5. Not that it was bad though!
That 9500i did pretty darn good :shock:
Did they fix the ramp up on the 9500i? Still wondering what Escort did? Firmware update?
I definitely wouldn't call the G7M4 horn in the Vector or RX series "lousy". The G7M4 horn performed nearly identically to the X5M4 horn in the 8500 X50 except in the around the curve tests. Note that the G7M4 horns used in the Bel RDs and the X5M4 or 95M4 horns used in the Escort RDs are different even though their FCC IDs end with "M4".Quote:
Originally Posted by strmchaxsr
I bet that Escort's engineers have been working overtime on the 9500i's firmware in order to really tweak the performance since the 9500i is Escort's flagship model. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by carboncopy
v1 still living up to its expectations......jeez i didnt know the escort solo 2 was so crappy, i thought it was actually a decent detector
As the professor would say it is the best cordless detector in the marketQuote:
Originally Posted by richardboy316
Wow, looks like it might be time to upgrade from the RX65...
One thing I learned from this test is that the 940 kicks A$$ major A$$
thank you guys for doing what you do. id like to remind everybody that visits your site that testing costs money and they should donate to the cause. heres another $20 guys - ill send more next time.
X2, 20 from me too, wish I could do more...college poor sucks :cry: Thanks for rebuilding my V1 confidence :)Quote:
Originally Posted by BullyDawg19
Not to mention I feel kinda sick about the pro-78's results :( Makes me wonder if I got a sour birthday present for my dad *ponders* :roll:
I too was surprised by the "poor" performance of the 78
thanks guys for the donations. EVERY donation helps and is encouraging to see support. Hopefully we can save enough to buy RETAIL jammers AT LEAST a Blinder and an LI
Yeah when you save up for a looonggg time from a crappy job, you want to appreciate something you buy more, but when you see it for what it is (the numbers), it makes for a sad day :(...Ohhh well :) At least it is better than his pro 73Quote:
Originally Posted by strmchaxsr
Send it to Mike B he can really massage the Pro 78 and make it better.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ven0mizer
Thanks for the hard work guys.
This is wrong. When talking about distances vs sensitivity (in dB - logarithmic), it is the difference in distance that counts, NOT the ratio. This is because the signal is is relative to the distance squared.Quote:
Originally Posted by guysoflidar.com
Therefore, it is expected that (in ideal conditions) the DIFFERENCE in distances with / without foam be the same. NOT THE RATIO.
So, the question is, how did the prime rib do?
Did it beat all comers hands down or what?
Hell yeah finished firstQuote:
Originally Posted by BigFloppy
dude you don't even know. that's by far the best meal of my life! great it's 10:30PM and I'm thinking about driving to Cleveland to get some, Happya$$ tell the woman to get to cooking haha.Quote:
Originally Posted by BigFloppy
PrimeRib owns all! many pretenders but nothing can touch it.
I'll be there in 4 hours. :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by thestaton
J/
Wow, the 9500I did awesome! :shock: Very impressive, I'm glad I keep POP off. :D
Now someone needs to find another way to beat up on the 9500I so the next tests you do it will smoke the V1. :wink:
Oh believe me It's not hard considering the detector comes from escort :wink: A company that Produces the STi with huge manufacturer variancesQuote:
Originally Posted by CJR238
The only thing V1 seemed to lack on was Foward Facing 35.5... Nice Job guys!!!!!!!!!! Keep up the great work!
Man did the 9500i shock me.. :shock: :roll:
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the STi test with bands off. It appears that the KA range got worse with X off. I'm glad the V1 reacted better when bands and POP were turned off.
So what does the GOL think about the results of the STi with different settings? I'm assuming the numbers tell it like it is.
Oh and its safe to say that POP off increases range.
Wow, great stuff!
We now have a GOL section and we just got new test results? Could we ask for more? haha
I'm loving how the V1 dominated with authoritative style as usual :). I was also proud of the STI on 33.8 (basically right there with the V1 ). Check out the 3.863 on the k band detection (despite how some bad mouth the newer V1 detectors.)
The around the curve test with the stalker was also impressive. I can personally say that compared to the Bell and escort detectors I have used the V1 really does seem to have the best off axis (as shown in this one specific instance).
Great job guys!!!!
good job GOL
Good question. those tests where a lot of fun but there didn't see to be any rhyme or reason. The STi if I remember did best with Pop On & SWS On... That goes against all logic.Quote:
Originally Posted by polakatl
It was a fun and hopefully we can do some more mythbusters in the future.
But this goes out to the RX-65 users who have cried for over a year now "test it in USA vs. Intl".... Yeah. About that USA mode :)
were any tests conducted on the truelock feature alone? it seems i saw it mentioned somewhere. and how did the 9500's ramp up perform?
yeah if happya$$ would get off his lazya$$ we would have about 5 videos for you. but he's only had a month and some change so "we have to wait".Quote:
Originally Posted by BullyDawg19
but bottom line it doesn't work and it's dangerous.
Juggle two kids, a wife, full time school, full time work, and then come and talk to me. Lets see videos, family life, work or school? What is more important? Lets beat a subject to death on the 9500i. There is only so many ways we can show it just like the 33.8 issue. I think people get the point by now. If they do not they will neverQuote:
Originally Posted by thestaton
I think you are misunderstanding what we are trying to say here.Quote:
Originally Posted by ahmadr
When we mention ratios, we're not talking about distances vs sensitivity in dBm, none of our results are in dBm. We're talking about one detector's distance vs another detector's distance in the results..
So for example, let's say that Detector A gets 500 feet of range in the eccosorb test, and Detector B gets 1000 feet (500 feet better, but also double the distance). If the same two detectors are tested on a long course, and if Detector A gets 5 miles range, then one would expect detector B to get 10 miles of range (not 5 miles + 500 feet).
To relate to sensitivity in dBm: in this example, of course Detector B is obviously 6dB more sensitive than Detector A, and should get double the range of Detector A (in bore-sight test conditions of course), and the ratio between the distances of the two detectors always stays the same.
In this respect, the ratio between the detectors is what matters.